Thus we return to the two-word note left outside the mail room as the resident faculty made their way from the macadamia mineswine cellar library, where they sent the weekend chipping out food for the Squirreldrinking thinking on our motto of Magis vinum, magis verum (“More wine, more truth”), to the hot tub faculty lounge for their weekly game where the underwear goes flying planning conference.

The note read: “Damn It?”

The question mark made this familiar phrase intriguing. The Professor of Astrology Janitor suggested the resident faculty might be unsure whether they were upset. Chef asked if he had ever been unsure whether he was upset. He shook his head. “I may wonder why I’m upset. I may wonder whether I should be upset or whether I’m overreacting. But I’ve never wondered whether I am upset. If I’m upset, I know I’m upset.”

As the Squirrel began tapping away on his Blewberry, the rest of the staff agreed with the Professor of Astrology Janitor’s explanation. Perhaps the resident faculty were upset, but weren’t sure why.

“Damn etymology,” the Squirrel texted. We asked if he was having trouble finding a reference, but he shook his head. “No, I found the origin of the word ‘damn.’ It comes from the Old French damner, meaning ‘to condemn, convict, blame, or injure.’ They’re asking whether something should be condemned.”

“Wat dont dey like?” Pootie the Precious texted on her iHazPhone.

The Squirrel’s tail and ear tufts began twitching as his paws flew over his Blewberry. “‘I don’t like it’ may be just a personal preference. A moral judgment says ‘We should all condemn it.'”

5 Comments

‎”You can safely assume that you’ve created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.”
~ Anne Lamott

This quote echoes the week’s theme. I’m looking forward to it.

NCrissieB
on April 2, 2012 at 7:45 am

Dr. Haidt takes no position on the existence of deities, and suggests we create religions for pretty much that reason. Behaviors can offend our senses of right and wrong for many reasons, and the reasons vary among cultures. But each culture tells stories that ground their moral rules in a god, natural law, fundamental rights, or some other external authority. Lamott’s quote exposes the arbitrariness lurking beneath the surface of supposed external authorities.

Dr. Haidt argues that we tell these external authority stories because they feel less arbitrary – thus more likely to be more widely accepted – than grounding moral judgment in “because I said so,” “because most of us said so,” or “because the most powerful among us said so.” If enough of us accept the external authority, we internalize the norms and cooperate better … and better cooperation helps us survive.

Just when I thought there were certain moral judgments most of us would agree upon – very basic judgments – along come the Republicans to throw all that out the window.

With regard to external authorities, this conversation could certainly be interesting, considering that when you enter the faith realm of God and religion, there’s really very little discussing to be done, which leaves a whole lot of arguing: My God or Your God?

NCrissieB
on April 2, 2012 at 8:21 am

Dr. Haidt suggests it’s less “My God or Your God” than “Our God or Their God” or, more broadly, “Our External Authority or Their External Authority.” When it comes to morality, we’re less “selfish” than “groupish” (Haidt’s term).